Equinox

Thanks Andrew, that makes sense - I think I'll add that to my notes.

Gamera

I really think you're reading too much into this. The creed (which in my estimation was the worse development in the history of Christianity) foolishly makes the acceptance of trinitarianism (in some form or other) central to Christianity, with the result that it attempts to reduce the inexplicable into the undeniable which results in the incoherent.

Since trinitarianism is by definition beyond the capacity of the human mind to understand (as numberless midiaeval theologicians have amply demonstrated), to make it a credal requirement of Christianity results in the search for distinctions like this. Clearly God the Father can be lord and the Lord Jesus can be God in the trinitarian universe, so parcing the words only results in confusion.

Which it has since the counsel of Nicea.

EthnAlln

And, as someone (I forget who) once remarked, died in time to avoid being declared heretical himself, either as a Sabellian (arguing that the Father and Son are not distinct persons, but only different aspects of the same person) or a Monophysite (arguing that Christ had only one nature, i.e., was not simultaneously "fully human" and "fully divine.") These days, almost nobody can consider these issues important or believe that anybody actually knows which of the doctrines (if any) is true. My view is that they are all incoherent, since they neither account for nor rule out any event that a human being could conceivably observe.

EthnAlln

Apparently the IIDB doesn't have the proper fonts to display the Greek. If your computer has them, you can get a more legible view at this website.

mountainman

I have extracts of most (if not all extant)
which relate to the council of Nicaea:

Philostorgius
Rufinius of Aqueila
Socrates Scholasticus
Hermias Sozomen
Theodoret of Cyrus

This version has a disclaimer, for those who do not so declare "the belief",
whatsoever that belief may have implicated or explicated.

This is important issue to (additionally) understand, IMO.

Soul Invictus

I'll be sure to check these out. Thanks.


I don't understand. Without knowing what this disclaimer means, I don't see how it addresses my questions at all. Can you tell me what it's supposed to mean?

Amedeo

FOOLISHLY???
There are a few things you do not understand:

-- The creed reflects the BELIEF of the Greek Christians who formulated the Trinity , See John the Evangelist and other theologians. There were non-Trinitarian Christians. So? They, including the Apostles, were considered to be in the wrong.
-- The creed is the platform of the Church of Jesus Christ which Greek Christiand established in contradiction to the Church [People] of God that Abraham had established. So, the Catholic religion was NOT the Judaic religion which the Early Gentile converts had joined

Different religions, different churches, different Gods. The Jewish God and the Trinity are different deities. The Trinity is no more difficult to understand than any god is; we even have humans with three personalities.

By the way, the Trinity consists of the Creator, the Logos or Word through whom creation is accomplished, and the Life-Giving Breath. (The man Jesus is not part of the Trinity.)
AND, from # 6:

Osbert

I believe you are right, they are different deities.
I think that the trinity comes from Greek and Egyptian Mysteries but I am not sure which was the greater influence.
Do you know where I can find any reference on that?

mountainman

The creed signed by the attendees at Nicaea,
after the "I believe in this and that" had the
following disclaimer ...

But for those who say:
"There was a time when he was not," and
"He was not before he was begotten" and
"He was made from that which did not exist," and those who assert that
he is of other substance or essence than the Father, or that
he was created, or
he is susceptible of change.'
the holy Catholic and Apostolic church anathematizes.

These are the words of Arius, on account of which
we are told by some, that Constantine called the
Council of Nicaea.

Gamera

Yes, foolishly. The gospel message is not about what you "beleive" (a process of racionation) but what you accept -- and existential choice. By making doctrine the center of Christianity, the creeds hobbled Christianity and distorted the message. The gospels don't ask you to beleive in anything (not even God), but rather to accept God's love as set forth in the narrative.

The Christianity of Jesus, Paul and the authors of the Christian scriptures is narrative, not theological.